Government of Gujarat vs ALPESHBHAI VALLABBHAI AGHERA — 113/2026

Case under Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B. Disposed: Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJJN080001282026

Filing Number

113/2026

Filing Date

08-Jan-2026

Registration No

113/2026

Registration Date

08-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, KESHOD

Judge

1-Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PLEAD GUILTY

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11203030250919

Police Station

KESHOD POLICE STATION - JUNAGADH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

Gujarat (Bombay) Prohibition Act, 1949 Section 66(1)B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat

    Adv. APP

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ALPESHBHAI VALLABBHAI AGHERA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: Case 113/2026 The court convicted accused Manoj Alpeshbhai Uffe Suki Vallabhbhai Aghera under Section 277 of the IPC and Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹100 or three days simple imprisonment in default. The court found the accused guilty after he pleaded guilty, admitting to his offense and requesting rehabilitation as he belonged to an economically weaker section with family responsibilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 20-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 08-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 113/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Case 113/2026 The court convicted accused Manoj Alpeshbhai Uffe Suki Vallabhbhai Aghera under Section 277 of the IPC and Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, sentencing him to a fine of ₹100 or three days simple imprisonment in default. The court found the accused guilty after he pleaded guilty, admitting to his offense and requesting rehabilitation as he belonged to an economically weaker section with family responsibilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case